Epic fail? 70-200s of all makes among least reliable lenses

Which words spring to mind when you think about 70-200mm zoom lenses - solid and dependable or fragile and unreliable? Lensrentals' Roger Cicala has just published an analysis of the failure rates of the 12,000 lenses he rents out, and the results may surprise you. Even having taken into account popularity and accidental damage, five 70-200s turn up in his highest failure rate table - including the latest models from Canon and Nikon.

As always with Roger's work, we'd recommend reading his entire article before commenting - partly because he openly discusses the inherent weaknesses and gaps of his analyses, but mainly because it's really interesting.

A picture of complexity - between the optics and the case of this Canon 70-200mm you'll find gearing to reverse the movement of turning the zoom ring, along with a small screw for adjusting the tilt of one of the lens elements - as well as all the electronics and motors you might expect. Picture courtesy of Lensrentals

So why is it these reputedly 'bomb-proof' workhorses need constant maintenance? A closer look at the Lensrentals figures sheds a little light on some specifics - 40% of failures of the Nikkor come from jammed zoom mechanisms, while all the Sonys suffered from AF motor failures, suggesting some of the problems stem from specific design flaws.

A close-up of that adjustment screw - just one of many widgets-per-cubic-centimeter typical in a 70-200mm lens. Picture courtesy of Lensrentals

We spoke to Cicala, wondering whether it was their very reputation for durability that was the 70-200's undoing. 'I think that's part of it' he agrees: 'they tend to be hard-use lenses, with sporting events and action shooting being the order of the day.'

We also wondered whether it was a consequence of shipping such large, heavy lenses around - something Cicala had also considered: 'they are heavy and when they bang into a table, hanging from a neck strap, or get dropped during shipping, that's a lot of momentum jarring the insides.'

But there's more to it than this, he suggests: 'supertelephoto primes are also heavy and get shipped just as much but they hardly ever fail. This could be because they tend to be monopod or tripod mounted, and people baby them (they're aware that dropping a rented 600mm f/4 IS would cost a fortune), but I don't think that explains the whole difference.'

The final factor, he says, is complexity: 'When we disassemble any of the 70-200 F2.8s, the insides are exceedingly robust and well put together, but they're also probably the most complex as far as widgets-per-cubic centimeter of any lens. The supertele primes aren't nearly as jam-packed - there's a lot more space between components, usually.'

After I read the Nikon AF-S VR Nikkor 70-200mm 1:2.8G review inMay, 2008 by Andy Westlake, I sold my newly bought 70-200 and put my old 80-200 back in service. Having read this, I now have another reason to hold back.

The old Minolta Maxxum screw drive lenses have served flawlessly for 25 years. Not one problem with anything from 16mm to 600mm. Two of the lenses took heavy falls onto basement floor concrete. They work perfectly and hardly show any external damage.

The old original Tamron 70-210/2.8 SP LD AF (screwdrive) works like new after 20 years... Having lived through Maxxum 9000, 9xi, 9, and Sony a900. It won't die.

My Canon 70-200 /2.8 is rev. 1 was around the world, shooting music festivals, many commercial jobs, and I was still able to sell it for more then I paid brand new, when I picked up my MkII. My secret, I TAKE CARE OF MY EQUIPMENT, and don't use my lens as a tactical weapon, garden tool, stool, or in the stead of other household items, and my equipment does not fail me.

My Olympus 35-100 2.0 or 70-200 in your world is one of most beautifully made lenses ever made with great reliability and output second to none. Hopefully Olympus can come up with a better sensor and AF compatible with this wonderful lens in next couple months.....

We don't just buy brands, we "buy" the distribution/support system. We therefore generally buy Canon. The guy is a ring away. Granted, I usually want something yesterday and for free (a compromise from my original stance, two days ago and you pay me...) and he usually wants to deliver something in two weeks for a lot of money, but he's better than Nikon.

The worst? Setting aside consumer stuff like Samsung, I'd say the current worst is Pentax. Distributor in one city; service in another. They apparently rarely speak. Go figure.

I only have one MF lens,a new Nikon 50 1.2, which I bought partly because it reminded me of the best of the old designs. I did not know Nikon still made them but it is a thing of beauty to hold and adjust. So a modern lens Could be made to that mechanical precsion but few would want to pay for it. I imagine that that lens will out last my cameras, other lenses and me.

It's nice to get such insight... that is one side of the picture we never get to see: relative/comparative reliability between various 70-200 lens models.

Obviously the manufacturers would never let on that they have a problem or flawed product. They probably don't even know how reliable their own products are compared to the competition. Until you get reports like this, made public.

Isn't the amount of time a product gets rented more important than the time between servicing? Plus the type of job a lens gets rented for?It's just an article to generate free PR for a rental company, means nothing to any of us in practical terms.

I have a 70-200 -2.8VR that never fails. When I remove the lens cover, there is an insulated bottle inside where i can carry my coffee. Good way to hide the "hot" stuff inside the photo bag. The 24-70 has a mugg inside. SPhoto shooting stuff and hot coffee at all time, all in one single camera bag :-) .

The only Epic fail i can see in this "article" is the disastrous quality of the 2 accompanying photos "courtesy of Lensrentals". Totally unaccepted!Better use this link for your next "article" : "www.photographersrentals dot lol".

Its not that simple, my friend. I would never rent equipment from a guy who takes a couple of crappy shots (close ups with a Canon 5D MII + 200mm lens with 1/160sec @f2.8 and ISO400!!!) and upload them to his Blog without hesitation. If you call this professionalism then i give up.If you visit the Blog of this Rental Company you'll see numerous "articles" of this guy discussing shooting techniques.....And after all this, a funny chap arrives acting as the self-appointed defender of the LR.com, a.k.a. "Claking"!Maybe he's hoping for an Epic Discount @ his next rental! I must say the whole story produced Epic Hilarity!

not really... if you read the article as DPR recommends, you'll notice that, for example there is a Canon 35mm prime where the AF switching consistently breaks. but you're right - primes have less parts, less stuff to break.

it's listed that EF70-200/2.8LIS2 got 42 weeks to failure and it's 51 weeks for EF70-200/4LIS, so we may get 62 weeks for an imaginary EF70-200/5.6LIS, also an estimation for 35-100/2.8. so you can have a 20 week gain by using a lens two-stops less capable.

I had the Nikon VRI 70-200 for 7 years and shot over 100k with it without failure. Then I traded it in for the VRII, in March, and I already apparently have focus problems-will be sending it back soon!!!

Think of user reviews of build quality as fit and finish instead. You can see how nice a lens feels, but an individual can't really know how reliable it is without running some sort of statistical analysis on many samples.

Really??? What a stupid conclusion. LR purchases brand new equipment direct, checks and services what they rent and turns over old inventory. They go far above what any other rental house does. You wouldn't know that because you don bother to read about them on their site. Troll comment.

I just had to have my Canon 70-200/2.8 non-IS serviced twice in the last month. The AF motor was not tracking, but Canon missed the fact during the first service that lens was still soft due to the fact that one or more of the lens elements were out with respect to "tilt", and the lens had to go back for a second service. All is well now, but I completely understand where Roger is coming from.

The lens did perform exceptionally well for the better part of a decade before needing service, however.

In 30+ years of shooting in all sorts of conditions with Olympus/Zuiko OM and HG/SHG digital lenses never once have I had a failure. Then the digitals do not have that IS bugaboo built into them, to create even more problems. Maybe Canikon should take a lesson from one the world's eminent lensmakers.

I shoot both Nikon and Olympus. Never had a single issue with my Olympus gear. Can't say the same about my Nikon gear. My 85mm F1.4G came with a decentering defect (repaired under warranty.) My 70-200mm VRII's zoom ring stuck after about a year of use (repaired under warranty.) Had a 50 F1.4D that ground louder and louder over time (repair refused because it was supposed to grind that loud according to Nikon. sold.) Had two SB-900s that just died one after another (both repaired under warranty and sold.) My D600 also suffered from the well known oil on sensor issue (sensor cleaned for free by Nikon, subsequent cleaning done by myself.)

I've seen/been around users who causally bang their 70-200s about, some talk "oh yeah we drop them all the time, they're built to last and be treated like that" oh really?It's still a collection of glass with a fine combination of gears and motors....

Im so glad that someone if finally bringing this informaton to light. I worked in a repair shop for many years and the construction of most lenses today is completely awful. Regardless of the materials used the design of them internally is terrible. Typically designed to keep the lenses small but at the cost of the overall construction and product longevity. Some of the Canon lenses are exquisite and some are almost worst case scenario, and I am talkng about L lenses here both zoom and prime. Nikon too.

My "ancient" 80-200 Nikkor AF without an internal AF motor is looking real good after reading this article...

Let's face it... modern lenses are too complex for their own good. Prior to internal AF motors and IS we could count on Nikkors working for years without any problems unless one took a particularly bad hit/drop. I had a couple of lenses (105mm 2.5 and 20-35 2.8) that survived amazing drops and kept on clicking.

These days many Nikkors are fragile beasts that cost a small fortune to purchase. And the cost of repairing lenses has dramatically increased. I'm glad that I resisted the impulse to "upgrade" my lenses when my gear was still capable of doing everything I asked of the glass.

Nice to see the Sigma 120-300 OS has improved a lot. It has previously been the most repaired lens by a large margin IIRC.Sigma's new emphasis on QC seems to be more than just marketing.Shame on the Canon14L II, an expensive prime, no IS and likely to be looked after better than average due to that front element reminding you to take care with it but still fails a lot.

Never had a problem with my Tammy lens units, got three of them. But, I don't bang them around either. Not the most expensive lens units by far, but, for me, money doesn't grow on trees! I baby my lens units. They stay in the bag, capped when not in use, and I don't carry my camera on a neck strap. I use one of those strap to your wrist thingys.

I think a better way of looking at why these lens units fail, would be for the consumers to be honest as to what caused them to be sent in for repair. "Well, I got mad at my ex and slammed it against a coffee table."

Soooo, taken at face value, I guess the moral of the story is don't rent 70-200mm lenses from Lensrentals? :)

I have a few 70-200's and some much older 80-200's and even a sun 80-240 (built like a tank). I use them often, even accidentally dropped a 70-200 f4 a few times (and it still works fine). Hazards of the job.

If I were to fathom a guess, is that folks don't treat rentals as equally as they would treat one of their own, purchased with hard earned cash? I generally reserve my vintage lenses for harmful and wet use, (No electronics to short out and can withstand constant dis-assembly and a hair dryer). My EF and Simga's 70-200 are handled gently, always capped and shot with a regards towards wear and tear. Etc.

So while my first comment might seem a bit comical, there is a real issue to consider when renting lenses for critical (aka paid) applications.

@ Tkbslc. As an engineer whom understand statistics, I agree. I'm referring the larger sample size of lensrentals user base. However, you don't statics for issues dealing with common sense that if you take care of something built to last. It will.

@Tonio I have lenses that have been constantly used for over 25 years. Where a 70-200 something always accompanies EVERY shoot I take (that range replaces the need for a lot of other glass).

I used to rent a lot of gear in the past, and grew tired of dealing with the faults and mishaps extolled by others. While it might seem unrelated, I had two rental video camera's fail on me during a corporate training shoot. One ate the tape and jammed, and the other had a power issue. On the surface it seemed like a $500 loss, but in reality, when we added up the salaries (including the CEO and his execs), and other associated costs of having to reschedule a shoot? $20,000.

Not sure there's anything revelatory in your post. Common sense would dictate that rental cars are more abused than someone's personal auto too. Having said that, it's expensive to a renter to be charged for repairs to a high-ticket item, so it's not as if products are being abused.

The IS in my EF 70-200/2.8 IS II always made an ugly grinding noise, then it stopped working altogether after just over one year of very little use. Had to shell out $200 to Canon to have it fixed. My previous, non-IS 70-200/2.8 got 10 years of use and never had a single issue, and I sold it for $200 less than it cost me!

More of Roger's always excellent work. But for those of us who own and take reasonable care of our stuff, I think what this shows is that with hardware or software, the more complicated you make it, the more problems you will have. It's not really surprising that prime lenses have fewer problems than zooms.

Indeed, Nikon has two of the most unreliable lenses of the major manufacturers (only Sony has a less reliable lens — tiny sample size though), one of the longest turnaround times, and the highest average repair price (higher than Leica!).

As Richard said we discussed this (and I will add I found the discussion useful - Richard and Shawn had good thoughts about why this might be occurring).

I thought the 70-200 f/2.8 data was the most interesting of the repair frequency data tand was appropriate to look at as a subset. A lot of us own those lenses. I've always tended to think because they're so well built they're bomb-proof, which turns out not to be the case.

I have a Sigma 70-200/2.8 and 1.4 TC, pre-stabilization era. For sports, the lens was used mostly on a monopod for several years. First the TC got a bit loose (floppy). When it would not autofocus reliably, I set the TC aside and continued to use the lens until it, too, became loose. Being on a limited budget, I decided tofix it the best I could. Presently a few wraps of electrical tape hold the main body together well, and ample superglue fixed the TC. The tape is just enough nuisance to keep me from using the tripod clamp though.

I'm pretty sure my habit of leaning on the lens while using the monopod caused the problem in the first place. Now that I hold it, it works fine and shows no more problems. I still think of the lens as pretty much bullet-proof, and it has really strengthened my right-hand grip! In the long run, I'm sure the mass of these lenses is the primary wear factor- and I wouldn't want the added complexity of internal stabilization, at least for my use.

This is reminiscent of my father who said the most difficult design job he ever had was the fuel injection system on the Merlin engine. Every design broke because there was so much energy passing through such a small volume. He said reliability finally came down to getting the geometry right. High loads operating in small spaces leads to failure unless the mechanical design is perfect.

Hyperbole of the silly Web 2.0 headline aside, without knowing exactly what the lens endures in shipping or how an end user treats it, there is no way to draw any meaningful conclusions from rental house repair stats. Complex lenses, and no real control in such a "test" make such stats essentially meaningless. Which is why car companies don't use stats from a Hertz car rental agency to publish reliability numbers to their customers.

Most people treat their own gear better than a rental. And as we learned from the guy who put a camera inside of a package to follow it's arduous journey, delivery guys and complex electronics and optical formulas are recipes for disaster.

I've never had an issue with either my previous 70-200 f/2.8 VR I or 70-200 f/4 VR (so far so good). I've brought both lenses abroad to Europe, used them in all kinds of conditions, and have never had an issue. So no, "epic fail" is not a phrase that comes to mind with either of these terrific lenses.

I wasn't suggesting that my two lenses are representative of the majority of lenses made, just my positive experiences with two non-rental lenses.

And using one shipping company doesn't guarantee anything. Shipping centers all use a variety of drivers / delivery persons, and let's face it, they don't all handle packages with care, to say the least. I've watched a few packages of mine literally thrown onto the concrete porch like Frisbees from several feet away. Apparently those three extra steps to the porch are a killer. :-)But no you cannot be assured of anything when it comes to shipping.

If you'd ever rented from this company you'd know how nearly bomb-proof their packing is. Ive rented from them dozens of times and have never once received a package or item damaged in transit. They ship FedEx. Lenses come packed in quality photo cases, surrounded by external packing protection.

You're just defending your purchases as if Roger is attacking your personal gear. You probably carry stuff in a Pelican case too. If you really read the details about what parts fail on the lenses referenced in the article you'd know the "point" that is being made about higher failure rates for more complex designs. You WON'T read that 70-200 lenses are junk.

If you really read my original post you see I said "complex electronic and optical designs".

And as I said, there is the unknown about how people treat the rental item in usage. Ever get a DVD from the public library? People are animals when things do no belong to them which is why EVERY DVD at the library is like a scratched drink coaster. I'm guessing that people who treat library DVDs horribly have racks of perfectly clean, unscratched DVD. :-)

While my friend was pulling his hairs, I realised that by turning the focusing ring over and over again I started feeling like the the focusing gear was "attaching" (giving resistance) to the ring every now and then, which would make the distance scale move a little.

After ten or so minutes of mindless focusing ring turning, the focusing came back to life, distance scale started moving normally, AF came back to life.

Lens works good to this day.

I can't think of any lens which would have a problem from such a small shock. Then again, I can't think of any lens that would fix itself after that, like this one did :)

Perhaps the "failure rate" has something to do with intensity or kind of use. A 800mm lens probably never fails because the user will treat it like the luxury item it is. It will always be on a secure mount or in safe storage. A compact prime won't fail because is protrudes little and won't be twisted or yanked a lot to achieve different zoom settings. A 70-200 is very vunerable because the user will trip over rocks, while chasing a subject, and mangle the thing badly.

I think that is a reasonable idea. 70-200 are often hand held. Since they are longer and heavier then other hand-held lenses generally speaking, they may tend to get bumped, banged and even dropped more. Now don't think I am speaking from personal experience... surely I would never be so clumsy.

Sony's a7R Mark III shoots 42.4MP files at 10fps and incorporates a robust video feature set, large battery, refined ergonomics and more. It certainly looks impressive, but what is it like to use, and how does it stack up against the rest of the market? Find out in our full review.

The DJI Spark has received a lot of attention thanks to its diminutive size, but how does it stack up? In our review, we take a look at what it's like to fly this pint-sized drone, as well as what's in it for photographers.

Latest buying guides

Landscape photography isn't as simple as just showing up in front of a beautiful view and taking a couple of pictures. Landscape shooters have a unique set of needs and requirements for their gear, and we've selected some of our favorites in this buying guide.

Quick. Unpredictable. Unwilling to sit still. Kids really are the ultimate test for a camera's autofocus system. We've compiled a short list of what we think are the best options for parents trying to keep up with young kids, and narrowed it down to one best all-rounder.

If you're a serious enthusiast or working pro, the very best digital cameras on the market will cost you at least $2000. That's a lot of money, but generally speaking these cameras offer the highest resolution, the best build quality and the most advanced video specs out there, as well as fast burst rates and top-notch autofocus.

Are you a speed freak? Hungry to photograph anything that goes zoom? Or perhaps you just want to get Sports Illustrated level shots of your child's soccer game. Keep reading to find out which cameras we think are best for sports and action shooting.

Those shooting portraits and weddings need a camera with a decent autofocus system, which won't give up in low interior lighting. Good image quality at medium/high ISO sensitivity settings is a must, and great colors straight out of the camera will make your life much easier. These days, video is a big deal too. Read on to see which cameras are best suited to those tasks.

National Geographic has revealed the winner's of its annual Nature Photographer of the Year contest, and every shot from the Grand Prize winner down to the Honorable Mentions and People's Choice awards are fantastic.

Dutch police began training eagles to take down illegal drones all the way back in 2016, but after running into some training issues and a lack of demand for these trained birds, the program is being shut down.

The iMac Pro finally has a release date! The 8-core and 10-core models will arrive on December 14th, starting at a whopping $5,000 for the base model. 14- and 18-core models won't be available until 2018.

Apple and Google both offer improved Portrait Modes in their latest devices, but the two manufacturers take somewhat different approaches. Take a look at side-by-side shots to see how they square up and learn about the technologies behind them.

Moab, Utah is known for its unique desert landscapes as well as a multitude of adventurous outdoor activities. We traveled there recently with Scott Rinckenberger and the Olympus OM-D E-M10 III for an action-packed weekend of rock climbing and mountain biking – with a sunrise helicopter ride for good measure.

The Olympus 45mm F1.2 is one of the company's three F1.2 lenses, promising 'feathered' bokeh wide open, and a portrait-friendly effective focal length of 90mm. Check out our updated sample gallery to see what it can do.

It's the most wonderful time of the year: time to vote for your favorite cameras and lenses in our year-end Readers' Choice Awards. It certainly was a good year for compact cameras – cast your vote before the polls close!

Queens of the Stone Age frontman Josh Homme is under fire today after video and photos seem to show him purposely kicking photographer Chelsea Lauren in the face during last night's performance. His apologies, so far, have not gone over well.

NiSi Filters has announced a new variable ND filter that offers 1.5 stops and 5 stop of density variation and, at least according to the company, doesn't suffer from the dreaded X-effect at its most extreme settings.

National Geographic photographer Paul Nicklen and the Sea Legacy team were filming through tears, as they documented some of the final hour of a starving polar bear's life. The resulting video is haunting.

This year, plenty of amazing cameras, lenses, accessories and other products came through our doors. As 2017 winds down, we're highlighting some of our standout products of the year. Check out the winners of the 2017 DPReview Awards!

Are you a speed freak? Hungry to photograph anything that goes 'zoom'? Or perhaps you just want to get Sports Illustrated-level shots of your child's soccer game. Keep reading to find out which cameras we think are best for sports and action shooting.

Still yearning for an Aperture replacement? Here's a quick overview of RAW Power, a Raw image editor for iOS that pairs with the Mac application introduced in 2016. Take a look at some of its capabilities.